Since JK Rowling has blocked any reply to this litany of half-truths and transphobic dogwhistles, I thought I'd catalogue them properly here:
1a. In the case of Maya Forstater.

Firstly, she did not "lose her job" (she was a contract worker, her contract was not renewed). The distinction is important both legally and linguistically - since "losing a job" casts Forstater as the victim, implying she was fired.
1b. Forstater also did not "ask the judge to rule on whether a philosophical belief that sex is determined by biology is protected by law".

She asked the judge to rule that (among other things) misgendering was protected speech. This was the judge's response.
1c. And here's the full judgement, for those wanting to know more.

I'll also note that not once in JK's blog post does she reference an external source to support her views. She alludes to them, but never links.
1d. The distinction between the truth and JK's mischaracterisation is important - because *no one* is arguing that sex is not determined by biology.

This is a common transphobic attack to cast trans (and NB/intersex) rights in an absolutist light to make them seem absurd.
2a. JK lists all the sources from which her view of trans rights has been informed. What's important here is that she's setting herself up as an authority - and so has *zero* defence for why she's so woefully uninformed on this issue, or why her views are so painfully one-sided.
2b. Note also that Rowling declares her "fictional female detective" as being "of an age to be interested in, and affected by, these issues".

Surely if this is an issue facing all cis women, age doesn't factor into it?
2c. And - since trans rights don't actually impinge women's rights at all - neither the character nor Rowling is materially affected by the issue.

The majority of women have no issue with trans women (or trans people in general, though JK is addressing trans women in this post).
3a. While any threats made against Rowling are deplorable - that would never justify a transphobic response.

The narrative JK is building here is one where she is the victim - not the trans community who are oppressed and marginalised every day.
3b. Note that - if Rowling was receiving criticism for holding views she did not hold, this could easily have been remedied by her making a clear statement of support for trans people.

Instead, her publisher declared it a "middle aged moment".
4a. Rowling describes Magdalen Burns in the kindest of terms. Here's how Magdalen Burns described trans people.

For the avoidance of doubt, being transgender is not a "fetish". Psychologists don't think that. Doctors and Biologists don't think that. Only bigots think that.
4b. Another transphobic trope is on display here - using lesbians as a cover to present yet another straw-man lie about the trans people.

If you want to learn what the vast majority of the Lesbian community think about trans people, I recommend following @BellaRizinti.
5a. The victimhood continues - with the hilarious contradiction that she was on her "4th or 5th cancellation".

Not only is she cherry-picking the worst abuse (which is deplorable, but does not excuse transphobia) she's ridiculing the harm of her actions.
5b. More than a quarter of trans people have attempted suicide. That's not "contemplated" - but "attempted".

When trans people - and allies like myself - get so engaged in these issues, it's stats like this that drive it.
5c. Lives are literally at stake and the rejection of trans identities is the principle cause.

Imagine the impact on a young trans person to learn that someone they look to as an icon supports people who - loudly and publicly - call them mentally disturbed sexual deviants.
5d. And yet Rowling presents this as abusive hyperbole - compared to the very real pain of learning someone mulched The Prisoner of Azkaban.

Abuse is not okay - but trans people are allowed to be angry at their oppression and to express that anger in non-abusive ways.
6a. Now Rowling moves on to casting herself as the saviour. All these people supported her for supporting Forstater - some of whom "working in fields dealing with gender dysphoria and trans people".
6b. Note the choice of words. Not trans charities or specialist medical professionals. "Working in fields dealing with".

That could mean anything. Bathroom architects could claim that designation. And there's no evidence Rowling checked any of these claims.
6c. What these anonymous supporters are *not* are psychologists or doctors dealing directly with trans people.

How do I know this? Because:
a) if she could have, she'd have said so
b) her views are at odds with the vast majority of the medical profession in this area
6d. And these people are "...worried about the dangers to young people, gay people and about the erosion of women’s and girl’s rights."

Women and girl's rights are not being eroded. Trans rights are a threat to no one. It's both wrong and transphobic to imply otherwise.
6e. And finally we have the only acknowledgement of the impact of all this on trans people. And it's essentially concern-trolling about "trans youth" who are most afraid of their rights being curtailed - not of billionaires getting criticised for supporting people who hate them.
7. Again - Rowling turns to the very worst aspects of the conversation to tacitly justify her position.

That she was called misogynistic slurs is inexcusable - but there are no end of examples of her supporters doing the same. Here's just one prominent example:
7b. I'll stress again. Abuse is deplorable - but it does not license transphobia. Trans people receive this abuse (and far worse) every day - even more in the wake of Rowling's recent tweets.
7c. As for her "examples": the mother of the possibly-gay possibly-trans child is used to introduce another transphobic straw-man - the implication that non-trans people are receiving gender reassignment surgery.
7d. There are no end of checks required before trans people receive surgery - indeed, many do not transition or do not transition fully. And the waiting lists involved are years long.
7e. The idea of somebody's son being railroaded into surgery is just transphobic scaremongering.

If the mother believed that, it was transphobes who scared her into it. Trans people are the *very last people* who would ever want someone forced into a body of the wrong gender.
7f. As for Marks & Spencer - the thing Rowling presents as outrageous here is a requirement under UK law and has been since the Equality Act 2010.

People should use the bathroom corresponding to their gender identity.
7h. In short, the study found that an increased rate of criminality in trans women existed in the early part of the study (1973-88) but disappeared in the later half (89-03) as the lives of trans people improved.
7i. The danger to women (trans and cis) comes from cis men. By campaigning for trans women to be excluded from women's spaces, transphobes are actively calling for trans women to be subjected to the very danger from which they (wrongly) claim to be protecting themselves.
8a. The victim narrative continues. It's Rowling and her supporters who you're supposed to feel sorry for - there's been no mention yet of the actual plight of trans people.
8b. Note the use of "biological women" instead of the correct adjective "cis".

Rejecting "cis" is another transphobic staple, which is why Rowling (a professional writer) doesn't use it. She's casting herself as a neutral in this - but adopting the language of her chosen side.
8c. Cis is just an adjective that means "not trans". If you're cis then your gender identity matches the gender you were assigned at birth.

It is not in itself an identity (as transphobes often claim in another attempt to manufacture ambiguity to their advantage).
8d. This section ends with Rowlings worries about "new trans activism". Note the weasel word "new".

It implies something has changed.

(It hasn't. Trans people want what they always have - equal rights, dignity, and the ability to live their lives unmolested and unafraid.)
8e. By casting this as "new" Rowling creates space for neutral/uninformed readers to reconcile transphobic ideas with a historic support for LGBT people.

It glosses over the inherent contradictions she's about to introduce.
9a. Now we're getting into the outright falsehoods. No one is calling for the "legal definition of sex" to be replaced.

Sex - as it relates to things like MS - is a complex subject (one I've already covered above).
9b. Rowling is implying here that granting Trans people equality would somehow put MS patients at risk or change her ability to fund research into treatment.

She doesn't detail how at all (because she can't - it's a ridiculous suggestion).
9c. I'm not a doctor and don't know how MS presents differently between men and women - but let's take the assumption that's kindest to Rowling's argument. Let's assume it's a direct biological link to the Y chromosome.
9d. Trans people are calling for no law that would force trans men to be treated as cis men for medical conditions like this - or vice versa.
9e. No one is calling for a law to restrict funding for charities like Rowling's on the basis of gender or sex. If they are - tell me, I'll happily campaign against it and I'm sure the vast majority of trans people would join me.
9f. It's impossible to really grapple with this point, because Rowling has been (calculatingly) vague about the threat that trans rights pose to her charity's operation or the treatment of MS patients.
9g. It creates the impression of unreasonable, absolutist trans activists, without having to actually make the accusation directly or back it up in any way.

If this is familiar - it's the same tactics used by very many groups trying to justify the oppression of minorities.
10. More vague scaremongering. With an implicit "won't somebody think of the children".
11a. Free Speech!

First up - free speech does not include or protect hate speech. Any speech that - directly or indirectly - silences others is, itself, antithetical to free speech.
11b. This is a particular hot-button issue for me - so much I wrote an entire blog about it a few months back.

Trans voices are the ones being silenced in this discussion - not those of billionaires.
12a. More falsehoods and half-truths.

Detransition rates among trans people are *tiny*. There definitely needs to be more studies of this and detrans people deserve as much help and support as they can get. But that does not include using them as stick to beat trans people with.
12b. There are many safeguards in place to prevent non-trans people receiving gender reassignment surgery. These safeguards aren't perfect - because that's probably impossible - but they have been devised by experts and are continually under scrutiny, as they should be.
12e. This is another "won't somebody think of the children"? Except that - somebody *is* thinking of the children, because these children received proper help and support.
12f. There aren't suddenly more trans people. What's happening is that young trans people - who would previously have been left to handle a very confusing, ostracising time alone - are now receiving the support they deserve.

This is a *good thing*.
12g. There is no "right number" of trans people. As long as good safeguards are in place and the correct support is provided, the number of trans people coming out - of any age - shouldn't matter.
12h. Rowling is - again - tacitly referring to the transphobic myth that young people are being "transed" (i.e. wrongly convinced they are trans and given surgery they do not need) by vaguely defined powerful forces (working for one of the most marginalised groups on the planet).
12i. Trans people don't want to force cis people to transition any more than gay people want to rape straight people. It's the same bigoted lie, redecorated for the next generation of hate.

If Rowling had ever truly engaged with trans people, she'd know this.
13a. More building of the "young people being transed" myth.

No one is arguing for removing proper safeguards. But note how it's always the *parents* centred in this conversation - never the kids.
13b. Trans people know - more than anyone - the pain of having a body that does not match who you are. They are the last people who want anyone to wrongly undergo reassignment surgery.
13c. Rowling cites an actual source here (hooray) - but it's not to her credit, since Littman became a darling of the conservative right for her work, which has been largely slammed from many angles.
13d. There are many things I could cite to point out the flaws in the research - but the one that stood out to me was that the research was based on *parental assessment*, not the actual children on which is was based.
14a. Rowling goes on to cover the furore around Littman's work (omitting any details, of course) and again casts the trans community as a powerful lobby.
14b. Again the idea that trans people are at acute risk of suicide is ridiculed. And - again - no time is devoted to trans voices except as shrill activists with an absolutist agenda.
14c. There's a lot to go into around the Tavistock clinic - and a lot of disinformation and hyperbole from transphobes.

Needless to say the claim that there is no data/studies on the effects of transition is just wrong - the Dhenje paper (above, 7g) is but one example.
14d. I could detail how the "high resignation rate" cited by transphobes is a pretty typical rate of turnover for an organisation that size. But it's irrelevant because...
14e. ...even if Rowling is correct and there was some misguided agenda to trans as many young people as possible, *that isn't what trans people or trans activists want*.
15a. This is the first time Rowling actually refers to trans people in this post... and she immediately uses it to support the bigoted notion that trans people are somehow being tricked into their identities.
15b. This is another recycled homophobic trope. That people only turned gay because they couldn't get a partner of the opposite sex.

The really disgusting thing here is how Rowling erases the entire trans experience by musing on how she could somehow herself have been transed.
15c. The notion that people can be "made" trans (or gay/lesbian/etc...) is particular dangerous - because it's the root idea behind conversion therapy.

But Rowling just casually drops it into the conversation as her personal, hypothetical experience.
15d. The really insidious thing - intentional or otherwise - is that, by presenting it as her personal hypothetical, she makes it almost impossible to refute.

But she (clearly) knows nothing of actual trans experiences.
16. This is just more of the same. Her personal history certainly includes tragedy, and I'm sure we can all sympathise with that - but it has no bearing on the experiences of the trans people she's trying to claim she can relate to here.
- Aside -

This is exhausting & I've got *many* notifications - so thank you all who are sharing this thread.

I'm gonna keep going - but (because the longer this thread gets, the fewer will read on) I'm going to suggest a few trans people and allies you all should follow *now*.
- Aside -

My trans allyship has been greatly informed (and, on occasion, patiently indulged) by (in no particular order): @KatyMontgomerie, @2damntrans, @mimmymum, @DadTrans, @DavidPaisley, @doublehelix, @sineadactually, @AidanCTweets, and @SpillerOfTea. Among many more.
- Aside -

Please do recommend any great trans rights accounts that I've omitted here. There are many trans voices who deserve a far greater platform than I - let's try and give them one.
- Aside -

I've also been informed (thanks @LouiseRidley) that some of the links are broken in the Stonewall fact sheet (in 5b) so if someone could find the correct ones and share them, I'd greatly appreciate it.
17a. The "I have a trans friend" paragraph.

For those unfamiliar with this common trope of discriminators, this sort of thing is extremely problematic because it uses a member of the oppressed community as a shield against criticism from said community.
17b. It's no better than "Some of my best friends are black" except there's a lot more detail here.

I can't find the 60-90% statistic (she doesn't cite sources), but it's also irrelevant. Those 60-90% of dysphoric teens still deserve help and support.
17c. Rowling says she's been told over and over to meet with actual trans people - and yet she still spends this entire blog seeking to define what's transphobic and what isn't. Trans people get to define that. We cis should be listening.
17d. But - before a transphobe tries to turn that into an argument against this thread - transphobia is still a cis problem to solve.

Just as racism is the responsibility of white people; transphobia is the responsibility of cis people.
18a. I almost thought for a moment this would be a paragraph I could skip - but then she equates trans people to incels and Donald Trump.

I'll say again - abuse and violence are deplorable, but (as with all movements) they're a minority.
18b. A recent transphobic thread (that I won't give oxygen by sharing) advocated cis women carrying knives to stab trans women using women's spaces.

Anger exists on both sides. The difference is, the anger of trans people is legitimate.
18c. Violence and threats are uncalled for, but you can't fairly characterise the whole community by the actions of its worst members. That's literally the tactic Trump and others are using right now to discredit #BLM.
18d. Misogyny is another problem we desperately need to solve. But I don't know a single trans person (men and women) who doesn't agree with that.

The problem is, attempts to exclude people from womanhood undermine that fight. Trans women experience misogyny too.
18e. The whole tone here equates calls for Rowling (and co) to listen to trans voices to misogynist attempts to silence women. The two are not remotely the same.

She even uses the term "re-educating" in place of "becoming properly informed".
19a. Now we're getting to the real transphobia and denial of trans identities.

Again - no trans person is "denying the existence/importance of sex" or seeking to undermine any of the vital conversations around it. Claiming they are is a transphobic lie.
19b. Every woman has their own "biological reality" and many share that reality with other women. No woman shares that entire reality with any other woman - but that doesn't lessen its significance or reality.
19c. At the heart of both women's rights and trans rights is the principle of bodily autonomy. No one has the right to tell another person what to do with their body - whether it's a man regulating abortion or a woman restricting trans identities.
19d. "Woman" is not a costume or an idea in someone's head. No trans person is claiming it is - again, Rowling creates or repeats a strawman lie to create an avenue of attack.
19e. Transphobes repeatedly try to define a test for "womanhood" in a way that excludes trans women, but includes all cis - but they can't do it.

I don't know what it is to be a woman. I never will. I also don't know what it is to be a man other than myself.
19f. We can't climb into each other's minds and experience each other's identities. That's never going to be possible.

When someone tells you their identity, you have no basis for doubting them except prejudice.
19g. It's one of the most common transphobic tropes to equate being trans with adopting the stereotypes of your gender identity.

This is a bigoted deception about what being trans means. If Rowling had ever engaged with the trans community in good faith, she would know this.
19g. In full transphobic mode now, Rowling decries "inclusive" language - implicitly calling for people to misgender trans men (who may still menstruate).

She also equates such inclusivity to having "slurs shouted by violent men", something so hateful I don't need to lay it out.
20a. Domestic abuse is disgusting and it's horrible that Rowling went through this. I'm glad she escaped to strength and independence.

We should do everything we can to keep women safe from predatory men. Again - every trans person I know supports this.
20b. The problem is - as we've already discussed - trans women pose no greater danger to cis women than other cis women. The danger lies with cis men.
20c. Granting trans women access to women's spaces (as is their legal right in the UK and much of the western world) protects them against the cis men who pose every much a threat to them as they do cis women.
20d. There is no case for excluding trans women from women's spaces that does not actively put them at risk - to say nothing of the denial of basic dignity and oppression such a move would represent.
20e. There is also no mechanism to do it that would not be *extremely* misogynistic. Unless someone is going to inspect the genitals of everyone accessing a public bathroom or changing room, such a ban simply could not be enforced.
20f. The implicit suggestion here - which Rowling won't say, but many of her supporters do - is that trans people are rapists (remember Magdalen Berns and "sexual fetishists")
20g. They will present anecdotal examples of this, claiming proof - which is just an admission that no real evidence exists (because it's a bigoted lie).

I've seen many such attacks since Rowling's tweets 3 days ago. She doesn't address this abuse at all.
20h. Ultimately, what Rowling is calling for here is to actively endanger the real safety of trans people so she and her fellow transphobes can *feel* safe, despite their actual safety being unchanged by the presence of trans people.
20i. Now everyone should *absolutely* be able to feel safe in public. But if the thing making you feel unsafe is your prejudice - then you have no more right to a legal remedy than a racist has for feeling uneasy around black people.
21a. Rowling centres trans people for the first time in this section, but then undermines it by almost implying they're a necessary sacrifice for the safety of cis women.
21b. There are two more transphobic dogwhistles here:

"Trans-identified" implying that some external force did something to them. Just say "trans".

And "natal" which is another way of avoiding saying "cis", but which also tacitly implies trans people are unnatural.
21c. Self ID laws (which Rowling is alluding to in paragraph 2) remove bureaucratic barriers preventing trans people from getting a GRC.

They are not the slipperly-slope argument JK employs here to imply they grant cis men carte blanche to enter women's spaces.
21d. Many countries already have Self ID laws - Argentina, Ireland, Portugal, Norway - none of whom have reported rises in rates of related sex crimes.
21e. And - while there are many problems around the reporting and recording of crimes against women - which absolutely need fixing (again, as almost every trans person will agree) - this is not grounds for depriving trans people of their rights.
22a. I really sympathise with Rowling here. Not with her transphobia - but with what it does to her.

She is convinced by the half-truths she's been fed by the "gender critical" community and it's causing her very real distress over unfounded fears.
22b. As has been covered elsewhere (cc @AmyDyess, who gets RTed onto my feed so often I didn't realise I wasn't following her until now), the Gender Critical community is deeply toxic to its own members - and there's no better example than this.
22c. No trans person wants women and girls to be put at risk. But trans rights don't do that. There's no evidence supporting it and plenty to the contrary (see above).

Again, Rowling cites the abuse she received - which is awful - but makes no mention of the abuse she unleashed.
22d. The worst part of Rowling's tweets 3 days ago was when she quote-tweeted a young woman with 95 followers who had (with good reason) called her a "TERF".

This was an account with 14.5 million followers, holding someone with 95 up for attack. That's just bullying.
22e. Abuse is uncalled for - but "TERF" is no different a label than "racist" or "misogynist".

Using that level of power imbalance to silence her critics only demonstrates that Rowling cares about the abuse she receives - but not that she inflicts (however indirectly) on others.
23a. She really can't help herself. Every time she comes close to making a statement that gives any support for trans people - she undercuts it by implying it would be "virtue signalling" to do so.
23b. Again, she casts herself as the brave victim - in a blog that has repeated any number of transphobic tropes (while claiming deep knowledge of the subject, so it's not accidental) while spreading half-truths and disinformation.
23c. "Huge numbers of women are justifiably terrified" but what of the trans people who are terrified of far more than the women Rowling is championing, to the exclusion and total erasure of trans people - who don't just risk, but *experience* those things every day.
23d. I've been doxxed. My business has been defamed. I've received hate mail and threats of violence - once even from a *verified account*.

But I've never once needed to use those things to justify my support of the causes I believe in.
23e. And it's very telling how often Rowling goes back to that well. Essentially "I'm gender critical because I once received abuse from some trans allies".

There's no logic to that statement. It's a retroactive justification for bigotry that pre-dated the abuse.
24a. And we end (at last, sorry for the length) with a call to action and a litany of disingenuous lies.
24b. "None of the gender critical women I've talked to hates trans people" - well you can read the opinions of Forstater and Berns at the top of this thread to see that for the lie it is.
24c. "TERF" isn't an attempt to silence women anymore than "racist" is an attempt to silence white people. Most women aren't TERFs (not sure I can say the same about the other one, sadly).
24d. But a billionaire throwing her support behind a dishonest hate campaign - however much she may honestly believe the lies - absolutely silences people.

So I'm using my voice (and apparently my entire evening) to try and change that.
- Fin -

Thank you to all the people who have sent supportive DMs - I will try to answer all of you, but it might not be tonight.

And thank you to everyone who reached the end of this absurdly long thread. I apologise for my rambling and (likely) numerous typos.
Trans women are women.
Trans men are men.
Trans rights are human rights.

@jk_rowling - I implore you, you've been deceived but you don't need to deceive others in turn.

Love is the most powerful force, after all - not fear.
PS-1a. - Yes, sorry, there's more.

I mis-clicked in the middle and had to rewrite a bunch of tweets, but omitted something vital.

Autistic people are perfectly capable of knowing themselves and have exactly the same right to bodily autonomy as everyone else.
PS-1b. The ableist implication here is that autistic children are more likely to be tricked (something which - again - is not happening and is not part of any "trans agenda").

Again - if Rowling had engaged with any of the people she's writing about, she would already know this.
PS-2. I forgot to include the source for the screenshot in 2c.

My plan was to reference it in the next post - along with the stat that 58% of women oppose any/all prejudice against trans people - but got sidetracked.
You can follow @Carter_AndrewJ.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: